coosbaycreep
Member
I've been wanting something extremely powerful, pointless, and painful to shoot (and cheap too, because I can't afford an african double rifle or .50bmg) for awhile now, and since I have yet to find a place locally with a NEF handi-rifle in .500s&w in stock, I'm starting to lean more towards getting a 3.5" shotgun first instead. Bi-mart's running a pretty good sale on them tomorrow, but whether I actually make it there and pick one up instead of procrastinating like I usually do is a different story.
Which would be more powerful, assuming you use slugs with the 12ga?
How's the availability of slugs in 3.5"? Midway only lists one, and they're out of stock and over $3 each.
The price difference of ammo is a non-concern. Both .500 and 3.5" are almost $2 and up a shot, so I can't afford to shoot much of either, which doesn't matter anyway, since I expect the recoil to be so terrible that my shoulder will give in before my meager bank account does.
If I get a handi rifle, I plan on getting some of the 500 and 700 grain bullets from ballistic supply. Which would recoil worse, the .500 with 700gr. bullets, or an 870 with 3.5" slugs?
The good thing about the 3.5" shotgun is the ability to shoot shorter, cheaper shells, but I've already got a 590 for that (which I don't even hardly shoot anyway), so that's not really a valid reason for me to get another shotgun.
I don't hunt anything. Occasionally I shoot squirrels and rabbits and stuff, but that's a rarity. I like shooting water jugs, old car bodies, whatever trash people dump on the BLM land that I usually go shooting at.
How much more devastating (to targets and my shoulder) is a 3.5" compared to 3" slugs? Is the increased price of ammo and the cost of another gun chambered for it worth the price?
So, which one is the most bang for the buck?
Which would be more powerful, assuming you use slugs with the 12ga?
How's the availability of slugs in 3.5"? Midway only lists one, and they're out of stock and over $3 each.
The price difference of ammo is a non-concern. Both .500 and 3.5" are almost $2 and up a shot, so I can't afford to shoot much of either, which doesn't matter anyway, since I expect the recoil to be so terrible that my shoulder will give in before my meager bank account does.
If I get a handi rifle, I plan on getting some of the 500 and 700 grain bullets from ballistic supply. Which would recoil worse, the .500 with 700gr. bullets, or an 870 with 3.5" slugs?
The good thing about the 3.5" shotgun is the ability to shoot shorter, cheaper shells, but I've already got a 590 for that (which I don't even hardly shoot anyway), so that's not really a valid reason for me to get another shotgun.
I don't hunt anything. Occasionally I shoot squirrels and rabbits and stuff, but that's a rarity. I like shooting water jugs, old car bodies, whatever trash people dump on the BLM land that I usually go shooting at.
How much more devastating (to targets and my shoulder) is a 3.5" compared to 3" slugs? Is the increased price of ammo and the cost of another gun chambered for it worth the price?
So, which one is the most bang for the buck?